5 Chenell Drive, Suite 301, Concord, NH 03301 | usnh.edu

To: Members of the System Human Resources Council

From: Jim McGrail, Chief Human Resources Officer, USNH

Subject: November 14, 2019 meeting

Meeting is scheduled for November 14, 2019 9:30 a.m. – 11:30 a.m. at 5 Chenell Drive, Concord

AGENDA

1. Approval of 9/19/19 Meeting Minutes Attachment One

2. Benefits Update

• Open Enrollment

• Kronos Pilot

• Annual Benefits Report

3. Enrollment Trends Attachment Two

4. Phishing Awareness Attachment Three

SYSTEM HUMAN RESOURCES COUNCIL

2019 - 2020 Membership

Karen Crawford KSC karen.crawford@keene.edu Bob Dumond KSC rdumond@keene.edu George Smeaton KSC george.smeaton@keene.edu Derek Goodrich KSC dgoodrich@keene.edu

Caryn Ines PSU clines1@mail.plymouth.edu Karen Schaffner PSU kjschaffner@plymouth.edu Jennifer Smith PSU jmsmith10@plymouth.edu Dave Carpentiere PSU davec@plymouth.edu Nina Domina PSU nldomina@plymouth.edu

Katrina Boyajian USNH katrina.boyajian@usnh.edu

Anne DuBois GSC anne.dubois@granite.edu Maggie Hyndman GSC maggie.hyndman@granite.edu Crystal Bixby GSC crystal.bixby@granite.edu Jeffrey Day GSC jeffrey.day@granite.edu

Kathy Neils UNH kathleen.neils@unh.edu Sari Bennett UNH sari.bennett@unh.edu Janice Pierson UNH janice.pierson@unh.edu Valerie LeBrun, Chair UNH valerie.lebrun@unh.edu Gabriela Bradt UNH gabriela.bradt@unh.edu Kevan Carpenter UNH kevan.carpenter@unh.edu Stephanie Clarke UNH stephanie.clarke@unh.edu Lisa Jones UNH lisa.jones@unh,edu Joan Glutting UNH joan.glutting@unh.edu

James McGrail USNH james.mcgrail@usnh.edu Executive Secretary (non-voting)

In the event of inclement weather, please check for an email from Lauren prior to two hours before the meeting.

Non-Member Distribution: Todd Leach, Chancellor USNH chancellor@usnh.unh.edu Melinda Treadwell, President KSC melinda.treadwell@keene.edu Donald Birx, President PSU dlbirx@plymouth.edu James Dean, President UNH james.dean@unh.edu Mark Rubinstein, President GSC mark.rubinstein@granite.edu Keith Timmerman UNH keith.timmerman@unh.edu Vicki Wijeyesinghe UNH vicki.wijeyesinghe@unh.edu Lauren Dews USNH lauren.dews@usnh.edu Susan Poole USNH susan.poole@usnh.edu Marc Fournier USNH marc.fournier@usnh.edu

1

SYSTEM HUMAN RESOURCES COUNCIL

September 19, 2019

System Office Board Room

5 Chenell Drive, Concord, NH

Attendance

V. LeBrun ~ UNH (Chair)

K. Carpenter ~ UNH

S. Bennett ~ UNH

V. Wijeyesinghe ~ UNH

J. Pierson ~ UNH

K. Neils ~ UNH

K. Timmerman ~ UNH

G. Bradt ~ UNH

M. Hyndman ~ GSC

J. Day ~ GSC

C. Bixby ~ GSC

B. Dumond ~ KSC

K. Crawford ~ KSC

C. Ines ~ PSU

N. Domina ~ PSU

D. Carpentiere ~ PSU

J. Smith ~ PSU

K. Schaffner ~ PSU

K. Boyajian ~ SYS

J. McGrail ~ SYS

L. Dews ~ SYS

M. Fournier ~ SYS

1. SHRC Convenes

The meeting was called to order at 9:30 a.m. by Chair LeBrun, and the minutes of the May 23, 2019 meeting were approved as

written.

2. UTime Policy

The Council reviewed the new USY-V-C 4.9 UTime policy, citing areas where clarification is needed, particularly around Earned

Time cash-out, personal and sick time accruals based upon an 80-hour work period (40-hour work week). If there are additional

questions brought up by constituents, please refer them to Lauren or Marc via email.

3. Benefits Updates

Open Enrollment will occur 10/21/19 – 11/08/19. In addition to the O.E. packet distribution, HR Bulletins will be emailed, and

post cards will be sent to home addresses, reminding employees of both the O.E. dates as well as the requirements for earning up

to a $400 medical premium credit via the MyPath2Wellness program by 10/31/19. Subscribers can log in to MyCigna.com to

view confirmation of the wellness credits.

While there will be no benefit plan design changes in 2020, premiums will increase, due to USNH’s recent high claims volume.

Three new voluntary programs will be offered in 2020 through MetLife: Accident insurance, Critical Illness insurance, and Legal

assistance. Brochures were distributed and more information is available in the MyUSNHBenefits.edu website.

Marc explained the components of USNH’s fringe rates, and how they fit into savings objectives over the next several years.

USNH has had reserve funding which helped offset increasing medical costs over the last several years, but the current fringe rate

is no longer sustainable for campuses given market conditions. Market data has been under review to determine what is needed

to stabilize the fringe rate going forward.

4. Kronos Implementation

The Kronos build has been more complicated and lengthier than expected, due to expectations of multiple policies and several

collective bargaining contracts. Overall, this has been an opportunity for improving USNH’s business practices and processes,

including coding and interaction with Banner. On October 19, 2019, the System office and campus HR offices will go “live,” as

a pilot start with the new time management system. The following three phases will incorporate exempt employees and time

approvers, remaining non-exempt employees, and adjunct/student employees rolled in by spring, 2020. A detailed Kronos

presentation will be created and posted on the UTime page.

The Council adjourned at 11:30 a.m.

2

The Great Enrollment Crash

Students aren’t showing up. And it’s only going to get worse.

By BILL CONLEY, The Chronicle of Higher Education

September 6, 2019

Question: Who do you think made the following observation — and when?

“Even more alarming is the perception among a growing number of young people today that,

with escalating college costs and diminishing payoffs in terms of guaranteed career

opportunities, a postsecondary education simply may not be worth the huge investment.”

If you guessed that I pulled this from a magazine article published in the past couple of years,

you wouldn’t be alone. Point of fact: The above statement was made by Jack Maguire in Boston

College Magazine … in 1976.

For those of us who have been doing admissions work for a while — I’ve been in the business

since 1980 — to hear some form of Maguire’s concern today just seems like déjà vu all over

again. The 1980s were quickly dubbed the “demographic decade” as high-school graduation

rates declined and a stubborn recession pressed family pocketbooks. In fact, Maguire is widely

acknowledged as the father of enrollment management, the science that would be called upon to

relieve higher education’s enrollment pressures at the time.

Yield models have been invalidated by the sea change in student college-choice behavior.

The two decades that followed saw ebbs and flows in high-school graduation rates and an

inexorable increase in the sticker price of college. Yet with each demographic blip, and with

every crossing of a new are-you-kidding-me? threshold for cost of attendance, colleges still

reported record selectivity, robust enrollments, and financial-aid programs that, for some,

effectively reduced sticker shock. Indeed, reports of a higher-education bubble about to burst

appeared to be greatly exaggerated. American higher education seemingly had an elasticity that

could withstand periodic, short-term fluctuations in demand and cost.

Then came 2008. The Great Recession devastated university endowments, shattered the majority

of family wealth and income, and confounded the predictive modeling of enrollment managers.

The near-term chaos was very real. Somehow, at varying rates, most colleges managed to

survive, but in order to do so they established a “new normal” that would allow them to claim

renewed stability for the long haul. That brings us to the summer of 2019, when the cracks in this

new normal really started to show.

As has been the case in recent years, Bucknell University had a large and talented applicant pool

for the Class of 2023. Setting an aggressive target of 980 (40 more first-year students than in

2017), our yield model indicated that our admit pool, plus 30 to 35 students enrolled from the

3

wait list, would safely land us there by the first day of fall classes. That all changed on May 2.

The enrollment-deposit spigot went dry, considerably short of our goal. As it turned out, we

would need to enroll about 100 students from our wait list.

In the process of calling these wait-listed applicants, we learned that Bucknell was hardly alone

in its shortfall. Up and down the selectivity ladder, especially among private colleges, yield

models had been invalidated by a sea change in student college-choice behavior. After the May 1

deadline for candidates to accept or reject admissions offers, the National Association for

College Admission Counseling (NACAC) provides colleges the option to post a “still open for

business” status alerting potential applicants that there’s still time to submit an application. For

classes entering between 2014 and 2016, the average number of colleges that would consider

postdeadline applications over that three-year span was 436. For the past three years? The

average was 554 — a 27-percent increase.

This is my summer of 2019 takeaway: Higher education has fully entered a new structural

reality. You’d be naïve to believe that most colleges will be able to ride out this unexpected wave

as we have previous swells.

Those who saw modest high-school graduation dips by 2020 as surmountable must now absorb

the statistical reality: Things are only going to get worse. As Nathan Grawe has shown, a sharp

decrease in fertility during the Great Recession will further deepen the high-school graduation

trough by 2026. Meanwhile, the cost of attendance for both private and public colleges insists on

outpacing inflation, American incomes continue to stagnate, and college-endowment returns or

state subsidies can no longer support the discounting of sticker prices. And nearly three out of

four economists reportedly believe a significant recession is likely to be underway by 2021.

This perfect storm has changed, and will continue to change, student and family college-choice

behavior for the next decade and more. I see this playing out across three dimensions: majors,

money, and mission.

As any number of reports have shown, students have been inexorably marching away from the

traditional liberal-arts majors. One such report from the American Academy of Arts & Sciences

noted that bachelor’s degrees in the humanities represented 17 percent of all degrees conferred in

1967, compared with 5 percent in 2015. Pitzer College, a nationally ranked liberal-arts college,

reported that the five top majors among its Class of 2019 were: environmental analysis,

organizational studies, biology, economics, and psychology. Some preprofessional majors are

faring no better: Bachelor’s degrees in education declined by 15 percent between 2005 and 2015.

It is little wonder that the Pennsylvania System of Higher Education, significantly dependent on

teacher education, has seen its 14 state-owned universities lose 20 percent of their collective

enrollment since 2010.

Disruption is here to stay. Campus leaders cannot change the wind direction, but they can trim

the institutional sails.

I don’t see these trends changing, especially when coupled with stagnating income and the

resulting pressure on a family’s return-on-investment calculus. Many in higher education assume

4

families don’t value the liberal arts anymore, but it’s more nuanced than that. Families hear the

importance of “soft skills” (communications, creativity, etc.); they just don’t accept their

children need to major in a liberal-arts field to gain them and to secure a job after graduation.

Continued adherence to traditional, low-demand curricula or knee-jerk adopting of “hot” majors

will only exacerbate the problem.

Bucknell’s most significant shortfall this year was in admitted students who were offered

financial aid. I heard from other enrollment managers who had a similar experience. So, what

gives?

One answer could be Virginia Tech — not just the institution itself but the sector it represents.

Virginia Tech overenrolled its incoming first-year class by 1,000 students (talk about a yield

model imploding!). My guess is they did not anticipate the sharp rise in students aiming to attend

lower-cost, high-profile public institutions. Last year, four of the top six enrolled-overlap schools

for Bucknell were public universities. We fully expect to see at least that many for the Class of

2023.

The handwriting was probably on the wall, as the national, first-year discount rate had already

crested the 50-percent mark; according to the National Association of College and University

Business Officers (NACUBO), it was 39 percent as recently as 2008. This steep rise is

significantly fueled by colleges that have adopted the airline pricing model: If the plane is going

to fly anyway (and if there are still spots open), no harm in getting even pennies on an otherwise

unsold ticket. For colleges discounting at or above the national figure, this is unlikely to be a

sustainable strategy. However, in the meantime, they are no doubt pulling students away from

colleges that expect full-pay or better-pay students to foot the true bill. In short, price sensitivity

is a structural reality when supply (number of college beds and desks) is greater than demand.

At the dawn of the 20th century, the railroad industry nearly collapsed. Why? Because industry

leaders (wrongly) believed their primary mission to be railroading, not transportation. For too

long, colleges — public and private, liberal arts and research-driven, rural and urban — have

operated as if they’re solely in the higher-education business rather than in the broader

postsecondary-education sector. Traditional residential colleges took solace in slaying one-and-

done competitors like the University of Phoenix or MOOCs. Now the challenges come on

multiple fronts: There are still for-profit insurgents clipping at our heels, not to mention distance-

learning platforms, academic boot camps, and company-sponsored certificate programs.

Consider this comment from May 2019 by Tim Cook, Apple’s chief executive: “I don’t think a

four-year degree is necessary to be proficient in coding. I think that is an old, traditional view.”

I don’t expect Bucknell’s analysis of this year’s admissions cycle to show any meaningful

incursion by nontraditional competitors. However, what we won’t know is how many high-

school seniors opted out of the four-year college pathway in favor of shorter-term, anytime,

lower-cost credentialing. These legitimate competitors pose risks enrollment managers must

acknowledge before it is too late.

Disruption is here to stay. Campus leaders cannot change the wind direction, but they can trim

the institutional sails. For too long, the admissions dean or enrollment manager had the lone hand

5

on the tuition-revenue tiller. Now, it’s all hands (campus leadership, faculty, staff, trustees, etc.)

on deck, pulling the tactical lines in a coordinated, strategic fashion. Given the perilous voyage

ahead, what will your institution’s mix of majors, money, and mission be?

Bill Conley is vice president for enrollment management at Bucknell University.

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

What are Spam and Phishing Emails?

• Phishing is an attempt to acquire personal, sensitive, or financial information

– Asking for W2 or payment information is common

– Urgency or immediacy of request

• Spam is junk mail but can be a sign that someone’s account has beencompromised

• Sender email address is often ‘Spoofed’ where someone from the outsideimpersonates an employee

• My name may appear as Russell Battista instead of the Exchange standardof Battista, Russell

• Improper grammar is usually a telltale sign

• You are referred to by your formal name by someone that ‘knows’ you (Russell vs.Russ)

• A malicious email cannot harm your environment without action being taken

• UNH has anti-Spam protection, but a few usually get through.

13

What to do When You Receive Spam or Phishing Email

• Do not reply, click links, or open attachments

– Forward emails to phishing.report@unh.edu or got.spam@unh.edu soInformation Security is aware

• You can delete the email but you may be contacted to provide additionalinformation

– If you have clicked a link or opened an attachment, a scan should be run assoon as possible

• Contact us at IT.Security@unh.edu or the UNH Service Desk at Ext 2-4242

• Do not delete the email until you are instructed

– If you are unsure about the validity of the content, contact the sender in aseparate email

• The best line of defense is to review each email carefully.

Check before you Click!

14

Phishing Campaign Overview

• USNH purchased a software platform to run Phishing Campaigns where emailsand emails with attachments are sent to employees

– Objective: determine how many users will open an unknown/unexpectedattachment

• All USNH Employees with email addresses in the Global Address Book werecontacted within the campaign

• The goal is education for employees

– Users who opened the attachment were provided with a teachablemoment on how to avoid phishing

• The results started out strong (low response rate) but have increased to over11% of staff responding to emails.

Last Updated: 13 DEC 201715

Month over Month Results (Summary)

16